Authors, While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
1) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> 2) <!-- [rfced] We do believe the capitalized keywords are used in the RFC. Please review and let us know if any of the capitalized keywords should be used. Otherwise, we will remove the Terminology section and related references. Original: 1.1. Terminology The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, NOT RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. --> 3) <!-- [rfced] Would you like to include references for the sales data listed? Original: * iPhone (206+ million units sold in 2020): native support for haptic encoded data * Android (1.38+ billion units sold in 2020): API support of haptic buffers * W3C (HTML vibration API [W3C-Vibration]): Optionally supported in mobile web browsers. W3C has also defined vibration extensions for gamepads [W3C-Gamepad] * Game consoles (39+ million units sold in 2019): MS Xbox, Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Switch, etc. * XR devices (9+ million units sold in 2019): OpenXR haptic API --> 4) <!-- [rfced] May we expand CE as Customer Edge? Original: Since they represent the majority of CE devices, a strong case can be made for 'haptics' as a top-level media type. --> 5) <!-- [rfced] The text indicates the subtypes have not been registered by IANA, but ivs is being registered by this document. Please consider whether updates are needed. Is it correct that ivs is the only type mentioned in Section 2.5 being registered at this time? Note: likely different, but we see ogg has been registered as an application subtype (see https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/ogg). Original: While these subtypes have *not* been registered with IANA or standardized (yet), the prevalence of these haptic data formats in a large number of devices around the world, pre-dating the standardization of haptic tracks in ISOBMFF, provides a compelling argument for 'haptics' to be designated as a top-level media type: Perhaps remove mention of "not been registered with IANA? While these subtypes have *not* been standardized (yet), the prevalence of these haptic data formats in a large number of devices around the world, pre-dating the standardization of haptic tracks in ISOBMFF, provides a compelling argument for 'haptics' to be designated as a top-level media type: --> 6) <!-- [rfced] hmpg and hjif are being registered by this document. Please consider how this text can be updated for accuracy. Original: These codes are not registered yet, but the plan is indeed to standardize these haptic coding formats in the near future. Once standardized, these types should also be registered as subtypes of the 'haptics' top-level media type: --> 7) <!-- [rfced] For ease of the reader, we have updated "FourCC codes" as "FourCCs (four-character codes)". Alternatively, may we replace "FourCC" with "four-character codes", because this is the only place FourCC is used? Please review. Original: The MPEG ISOBMFF proposal included an informative annex of known haptic coding formats with proposed FourCC codes for them. Current: The MPEG ISOBMFF proposal included an informative annex of known haptic coding formats with proposed FourCCs (four-character codes) for them. --> 8) <!-- [rfced] Should "URLL" be "URLLC"? If correct, may we expand URLLC as "Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communication (URLLC)"? If not, please indicate how URLL should be expanded. Original: * IEEE P1918.1.1 vibrotactile coding standard [IEEE-P191811] being developed under the IEEE Tactile Internet initiative as part of the 5G URLL profile. --> 9) <!-- [rfced] [ISOBMFF-IS] This reference is the most current version of this standard, but there is a note on this version that states "Expected to be replaced by ISO/IEC DIS 14496-12.2 within the coming months." Please let us know if publication of this document should be delayed until ISO/IEC DIS 14496-12.2 is formally published (see https://www.iso.org/standard/85596.html). Original: [ISOBMFF-IS] "ISO/IEC 14496-12 (7th Edition) Information technology — Coding of audio-visual objects — Part 12: ISO base media file format", <https://www.iso.org/standard/83102.html>. --> 10) <!-- [rfced] [IEEE-P191811] The original URL redirected to the search page for IEEE Standards: https://standards.ieee.org/standard/. We have updated the reference as described on https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10555007. The status is marked as "Inactive - Draft". Please review and let us know if any updates are needed. [IEEE-P191811] "P1918.1.1 - Haptic Codecs for the Tactile Internet", <https://standards.ieee.org/project/1918_1_1.html>. --> 11) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online Style Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature typically result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. For example, please consider whether the following should be updated: native Note that native can be ambiguous because it is subjective. Perhaps "built-in" would work? --> Thank you. RFC Editor On Dec 23, 2024, at 11:03 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote: *****IMPORTANT***** Updated 2024/12/23 RFC Author(s): -------------- Instructions for Completing AUTH48 Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/). You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing your approval. Planning your review --------------------- Please review the following aspects of your document: * RFC Editor questions Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as follows: <!-- [rfced] ... --> These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. * Changes submitted by coauthors Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you agree to changes submitted by your coauthors. * Content Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to: - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) - contact information - references * Copyright notices and legends Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). * Semantic markup Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>. * Formatted output Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting limitations compared to the PDF and HTML. Submitting changes ------------------ To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties include: * your coauthors * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the responsible ADs, and the document shepherd). * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing list to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion list: * More info: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc * The archive itself: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/ * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded, auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list and its addition will be noted at the top of the message. You may submit your changes in one of two ways: An update to the provided XML file — OR — An explicit list of changes in this format Section # (or indicate Global) OLD: old text NEW: new text You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit list of changes, as either form is sufficient. We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager. Approving for publication -------------------------- To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. Files ----- The files are available here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695.txt Diff file of the text: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-rfcdiff.html (side by side) Diff of the XML: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9695-xmldiff1.html Tracking progress ----------------- The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9695 Please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation, RFC Editor -------------------------------------- RFC9695 (draft-ietf-mediaman-haptics-05) Title : The 'haptics' Top-level Media Type Author(s) : Y. Muthusamy, C. Ullrich WG Chair(s) : Harald T. Alvestrand Area Director(s) : Murray Kucherawy, Orie Steele -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
